DOCSLIB.ORG

Uranium from Russia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Uranium from Russia Uranium from Russia Investigation No. 731-TA-539-C (Third Review) Publication 4307 February 2012 U.S. International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 U.S. International Trade Commission COMMISSIONERS Deanna Tanner Okun, Chairman Irving A. Williamson, Vice Chairman Daniel R. Pearson Shara L. Aranoff Dean A. Pinkert David S. Johanson Karen Laney Acting Director of Operations Staff assigned Mary Messer, Investigator Jack Greenblatt, Industry Analyst Peter Sultan, Attorney Mary Messer, Acting Supervisory Investigator Address all communications to Secretary to the Commission United States International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 U.S. International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 www.usitc.gov Uranium from Russia Investigation No. 731-TA-539-C (Third Review) Publication 4307 February 2012 CONTENTS Page Determination................................................................... 1 Views of the Commission ......................................................... 3 Information obtained in the review .................................................. I-1 Introduction .................................................................. I-3 Background ............................................................... I-3 The original investigation .................................................... I-4 The first five-year review .................................................... I-5 The second five-year review .................................................. I-6 Commerce’s final result of expedited third five-year review ......................... I-6 Commerce’s administrative reviews............................................ I-7 Agreements regarding imports of uranium from Russia............................. I-7 Related investigations.......................................................... I-14 Summary data................................................................ I-14 The product .................................................................. I-14 Commerce’s scope.......................................................... I-14 U.S. tariff treatment......................................................... I-15 Domestic like product and domestic industry ..................................... I-17 Physical description ......................................................... I-17 Uses .................................................................... I-19 Production process .......................................................... I-19 Value-added by segment..................................................... I-24 Interchangeability and customer and producer perceptions .......................... I-25 Channels of distribution...................................................... I-26 Pricing and related information................................................ I-26 The industry in the United States ................................................. I-32 U.S. producers............................................................. I-32 Related party issues......................................................... I-34 Changes in the domestic industry .............................................. I-34 U.S. producers’ trade and financial data......................................... I-44 U.S. imports and apparent consumption............................................ I-47 U.S. importers............................................................. I-47 U.S. imports............................................................... I-47 Apparent U.S. consumption and market shares.................................... I-50 World production and consumption ............................................... I-52 Uranium mining and milling .................................................. I-52 Uranium conversion ........................................................ I-56 Uranium enrichment ........................................................ I-56 Fuel fabricators for lightwater reactors .......................................... I-58 Reprocessing industry and the recycling of military warheads ........................ I-58 i CONTENTS Page Information obtained in the review–Continued The industry in Russia ......................................................... I-59 Russian mining and milling industry ............................................ I-59 Russian conversion and fabrication industry ...................................... I-61 Russian uranium enrichment and reprocessing industry ............................. I-61 Uranium inventories in Russia................................................. I-63 Trade barriers in other countries ............................................... I-63 Appendix A. Federal Register notices ..................................................... A-1 B. Commission’s statement on adequacy........................................... B-1 C. Summary data ............................................................. C-1 Note.–Information that would reveal confidential operations of individual concerns may not be published and therefore has been deleted from this report. Such deletions are indicated by asterisks. ii UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Investigation No. 731-TA-539-C (Third Review) URANIUM FROM RUSSIA DETERMINATION On the basis of the record1 developed in the subject five-year review, the United States International Trade Commission (Commission) determines, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. ' 1675(c)), that termination of the suspended investigation on uranium from Russia would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.2 BACKGROUND The Commission instituted this review on July 1, 2011 (76 FR 38694) and determined on October 4, 2011 that it would conduct an expedited review (76 FR 64107, October 17, 2011). 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission=s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR ' 207.2(f)). 2 Chairman Deanna Tanner Okun did not participate in this review. VIEWS OF THE COMMISSION Based on the record in this five-year review, we determine under section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), that termination of the suspended antidumping investigation of uranium from Russia would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.1 I. BACKGROUND On December 23, 1991, the Commission determined that there was a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States was being materially injured by reason of imports of uranium from the U.S.S.R. that allegedly were being sold at less than fair value.2 Two days later, the Soviet Union dissolved into separate republics. The Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) and the Commission continued their respective investigations, with uranium producers in the 12 independent countries that occupied the territory of the former Soviet Union becoming the respondents in 12 separate investigations.3 Commerce issued preliminary determinations against the industries in the newly independent countries in June 1992.4 On October 16, 1992, Commerce entered into suspension agreements with the six Soviet successor countries (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan) that produced uranium.5 In early 1993, Tajikistan and Ukraine requested the termination of their suspension agreements. Accordingly, Commerce reopened the investigations of imports from those countries in April 1993, and issued final affirmative determinations as to each.6 The Commission issued a negative determination with respect to Tajikistan and an affirmative determination with respect to Ukraine in August 1993.7 Commerce subsequently issued an antidumping duty order on imports of uranium from Ukraine.8 The suspension agreements with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Uzbekistan remained in effect, and were subject to a series of amendments that broadened the range of products subject to the agreements, gave the subject countries a larger quota of U.S. imports, and, in the case of Russia, made 1 Chairman Deanna Tanner Okun not participating. 2 Uranium from U.S.S.R., Inv. No. 731-TA-539 (Preliminary) USITC Pub. 2471 (December 1991) (“Soviet Uranium”). 3 57 Fed. Reg. 11064 (Apr. 1, 1992). 4 57 Fed. Reg. 23380 (June 3, 1992). 5 See, e.g., Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Investigation on Uranium from Russia (Oct. 16, 1992), 57 Fed. Reg. 49220 (Oct. 30, 1992). Commerce subsequently terminated the investigations against the remaining countries that did not produce uranium on the grounds that there were no LTFV sales from those countries. 57 Fed. Reg. 48505 (Oct. 26, 1992). 6 Uranium From Ukraine and Tajikistan, 58 Fed. Reg. 36640 (July 8, 1993) (final) (“Final LTFV Determination – Ukraine”). 7 Uranium From Tajikistan and Ukraine, Inv. Nos. 731-TA-539-D-539-E (Final), USITC Pub. 2669 (Aug. 1993) (“Uranium From Tajikistan and Ukraine”). 8 58 Fed. Reg. 45483 (Aug. 30, 1993). 3 changes to correspond with the Russian Highly Enriched Uranium (“HEU”) Agreement9 and the USEC Privatization Act.10 In early 1999, the suspension agreement with Kazakhstan was terminated at the request of the Government of Kazakhstan. As a result of the termination, Commerce and the Commission resumed their investigations, and the Commission reached a negative final determination on July 13, 1999.11 The suspended investigation with respect to Kyrgyzstan was terminated by Commerce in November 1999, after no domestic
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Survey of Design and Regulatory Requirements for New Small Reactors, Contract No
    Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission - R550.1 Survey of Design and Regulatory Requirements for New Small Reactors, Contract No. 87055-13-0356 Final Report - July 3, 2014 RSP-0299 Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission R550.1 Survey of Design and Regulatory Requirements for New Small Reactors, Contract No. 87055-13-0356 Final Report July 3, Released for Brian Gihm 0 Victor Snell Jim Sarvinis Milan Ducic 2014 Use Victor Snell Date Rev. Status Prepared By Checked By Approved By Approved By Client - CNSC H346105-0000-00-124-0002, Rev. 0 Page i © Hatch 2015 All rights reserved, including all rights relating to the use of this document or its contents. Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission - R550.1 Survey of Design and Regulatory Requirements for New Small Reactors, Contract No. 87055-13-0356 Final Report - July 3, 2014 Executive Summary The objectives of this report are to perform a design survey of small modular reactors (SMRs) with near-term deployment potential, with a particular emphasis on identifying their innovative safety features, and to review the Canadian nuclear regulatory framework to assess whether the current and proposed regulatory documents adequately address SMR licensing challenges. SMRs are being designed to lower the initial financing cost of a nuclear power plant or to supply electricity in small grids (often in remote areas) which cannot accommodate large nuclear power plants (NPPs). The majority of the advanced SMR designs is based on pressurized water reactor (PWR) technology, while some non-PWR Generation IV technologies (e.g., gas-cooled reactor, lead-cooled reactor, sodium-cooled fast reactor, etc.) are also being pursued.
    [Show full text]
  • Bfd3bbcbd97066fa41086d0bc3b
    [email protected] www.po-mayak.ru FSUE “Mayak” PA 3 4 FSUE “Mayak” PA www.po-mayak.ru [email protected] Federal State Unitary Enterprise «Mayak» Production Association is the first Russian nuclear industrial site. Present-day PA «Mayak» is an up- to-date and dynamically developing enterprise of the State Atomic Energy Corporation «Rosatom». «Mayak» PA is the leading Russian and one of the biggest world manufacturers of sealed radionuclide sources. The product mix offered today by «Mayak» PA to domestic and foreign customers, includes more than 200 codes of alpha-, beta-, gamma- and neutron sources with various dimensional and radiation specifications, and with reactor isotopes Cobalt-60, Iridium-192, fission isotopes Caesium-137, Americium-241, Plutonium-239, Promethium-147, Strontium-90, etc., as their active material, as well as bulk isotopes with Carbon-14 and Helium-3 gas among them. Ionising sources are widely used for various scientific and technical applications such as radiation processing equipment, oil-well logging, industrial NDT instruments, gamma-radiography, various process control and measurement instruments and other gauges, and also in medicine. At present, acting under the Federal Law dated 11.07.2011, No. 190- FZ, «Mayak» PA accepts for long-term storage and re-processing the disused ionising sources operated in Russia and made both by «Mayak» PA and other manufacturers and Mayak’s origin sources operated outside Russia. At present «Mayak» PA has become an independent player in the market of re-sourcing of radiation facilities and machines. «Mayak» PA offers «from cradle to grave» service package that covers the entire life-cycle of the sources from their manufacture to disposal and allows working directly with organisations operating Mayak’s origin sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Program Jądrowy W Federacji Rosyjskiej 10
    Program jądrowy w Federacji Rosyjskiej PROGRAM POLSKIEJ ENERGETYKI JĄDROWEJ ANALIZY I OPRACOWANIA 10 materiał informacyjny opracowany przez Departament Energii Jądrowej Ministerstwa Energii JAMAŁ Rosyjski 150-metrowy lodołamacz wyposażony w dwa reaktory jądrowe. Jest jednym z niewielu statków, którym udało się dopłynąć do bieguna północne- go, i jedynym, któremu ta sztuka udała się kilkadziesiąt razy. Jednostka jest również statkiem wycieczkowym posiadającym 50 kabin i apartamentów. Opracowanie uwzględnia dane według stanu na maj 2016. Program jądrowy w Federacji Rosyjskiej Energia jądrowa pozostaje strategicznym priorytetem dla Rosji. Utrzy- muje się stały wzrost jej udziału w bilansie energetycznym kraju zarówno poprzez budowę nowych bloków jądrowych, jak i dzięki znacznej poprawie wydajności istniejących instalacji. Obecnie FR eksploatuje 35 reaktorów energetycznych o całkowitej mocy 26,1 GWe, które dostarczają ok. 18% krajowej produkcji energii elektrycznej, a w budowie znajduje się kolejnych 8 reaktorów. Do roku 2030 planowane jest uruchomienie 15 nowych reaktorów i zwiększenie udziału energii jądrowej w bilansie energetycznym do 25-30%. Kraj ten opanował pełny cykl paliwowy, w tym wzbogacanie uranu oraz przerób wypalonego paliwa i jest samowystarczalny pod względem zaopa- trzenia w paliwo jądrowe oraz postępowania z odpadami promieniotwór- czymi. Eksport urządzeń i usług jądrowych stanowi jeden z głównych celów politycznych i ekonomicznych państwa. Firmy rosyjskie oferują kom- pleksową dostawę technologii (budowa elektrowni, dostarczanie paliwa, demontaż) a państwo zapewnia wsparcie finansowe tych inwestycji. Rosja jest także światowym liderem w technologii reaktorów prędkich. 1 1. Bilans energetyczny Krajowa produkcja energii elek- na krajowe cele energetyczne. reaktora energetycznego. trycznej w 2012 r. wyniosła 1071 W 2015 r. całkowita zainstalo- W dalszej perspektywie strategia TWh, z czego 525 TWh wyprodu- wana moc elektrowni jądrowych rosyjska zakłada, że ograniczone kowano w elektrowniach gazowych wynosiła 26,1 GWe.
    [Show full text]
  • TENEX Public Annual Report 2018 001 Публичный Годовой Отчет АО «Техснабэкспорт» 2018 002 8
    TENEX Public Annual Report 2018 001 Публичный годовой отчет АО «Техснабэкспорт» 2018 002 8 Approved by the resolution of the Board of Directors dated 28.05.2019 Director General Sergey Polgorodnik TENEX Public Annual Report 2018 2 Key Indicators of 2018 3 Key Indicators of 2018 Uranium contracting Financial results 107.0 Revenue RUB billion Contracts 18 concluded 21.1 Net profit RUB billion Total value 2.0 of concluded Earnings US $ billion contracts before Interest, 33.4 Taxes, RUB billion Depreciation and Amortization Number (EBITDA) 12 of customers Uranium sales HR and social policy Sales Average staff number Social volume programs 1.7 324 15.6 funding US $ billion people RUB million Funds directed on charity Number 4.0 80 of supplies RUB billion Number of country- 11 recipients TENEX Public Annual Report 2018 4 Stakeholder Public Assurance 5 Stakeholder Public Assurance1 Full name Company and position Signature Full name Company and position Signature Akisheva Оlga Deputy Director General for Economics and Finance, JSC “UECC” Head of Department for NFC Lifecycle Projects Integration with Koryakin Konstantin Sectorial Policies System, ROSATOM Deputy Director for International Operation — Director Belyaeva Marina of International Cooperation Department, ROSATOM Krupnik Pavel Director of International Programs, Centrus Energy Corp. Bochkin Oleg Strategic Communications Director, LLC Rusatom Overseas Deputy Head, Department for Safety Regulation of Nuclear Lavrinovich Andrey Fuel Cycle Facilities, Nuclear Power Plants for Ships and Radiation-hazardous
    [Show full text]
  • Global Nuclear Markets – Market Arrangements and Service Agreements
    INL/EXT-16-38796 Global Nuclear Markets – Market Arrangements and Service Agreements Brent Dixon Leilani Beard June 2016 The INL is a U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratory operated by Battelle Energy Alliance DISCLAIMER This information was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the U.S. Government. Neither the U.S. Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness, of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. References herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trade mark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the U.S. Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. Government or any agency thereof. INL/EXT-16-38796 Global Nuclear Markets – Market Arrangements and Service Agreements Brent Dixon Leilani Beard June 2016 Idaho National Laboratory Nuclear Systems Design & Analysis Division Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Policy and Systems Analysis Under U.S. Department of Energy-Idaho Operations Office Contract DE-AC07-05ID14517 Forward The U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Policy and Systems Analysis (EPSA) requested an assessment of global nuclear markets, including the structure of nuclear companies in different countries and the partnerships between reactor vendors and buyers.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Power: Is the Renaissance Real Or a Mirage? H-Holger Rogner & Alan Mcdonald International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) 1
    Nuclear Power: Is the Renaissance Real or a Mirage? H-Holger Rogner & Alan McDonald International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) 1 Keywords: Nuclear power status and projections, nuclear power economics, manufacturing capacity Summary In 2009, in the midst of the global financial and economic crises that began in 2008, and as the nuclear power industry posted its first two-year decline in installed capacity in history, the IAEA revised its projections for future nuclear power growth upwards. This paper summarizes the status of nuclear power in the world today and the status of all steps in the nuclear fuel cycle. It summarizes nuclear power’s prospects and important trends in key factors. It explains the reasons for optimism and rising expectations about nuclear power’s future, and it acknowledges that there is, nonetheless, much uncertainty. Conflicting indicators For nuclear power, 2009 was a second straight paradoxical year. In 2008, pprojections of future growth were revised upwards even though installed nuclear capacity actually declined during the year and no new reactors were connected to the grid. It was the first year since 1955 without at least one new reactor coming on-line. There were, however, ten construction starts, the most since 1987. In 2009 installed nuclear capacity dropped yet again, the first two-year drop in nuclear power’s history, with three reactors being retired and only two new ones connected to the grid. But the IAEA’s projections for nuclear power growth were again revised upward, by about 8%, even as the world was still dealing with the financial and economic crises that started in late 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • CONTENTS Back to Contents
    NEWSLETTER #8 (244) AUGUST 2021 CONTENTS Back to contents ROSATOM NEWS TRENDS Kudankulam, High Five! Nuclear Technology Saves Lives Arctic Sea Lane ROSATOM GEOGRAPHY Russian Atom Reaches New Heights NEWSLETTER #8 (244) AUGUST 2021 ROSATOM NEWS Back to contents Представители ТВЭЛ, ENUSA, ENSA и IDOM подписывают меморандум we are prepared to launch mass Kudankulam, construction of Russian- designed power units with the state-of-the-art Generation High Five! III+ reactors at other sites in India. This possibility is stipulated in our existing Construction of Kudankulam Unit 5 agreements,” Director General of Rosatom has been officially kicked off. This is Alexey Likhachev said at the ceremony. the third stage of the Indian nuclear project carried out by Rosatom. Kudankulam profile The ceremony of pouring the first concrete for the basemat of Kudankulam Unit 5 The fifth power unit is constructed within located in the same-name town in the Indian the framework of a Russian- Indian treaty state of Tamil Nadu was held on June 29. signed in November 1988 and amended in June 1998. Since then, Rosatom has “The nuclear construction project in constructed and put in operation two power Kudankulam has been a symbol of close units of the Kudankulam Nuclear Power collaboration between Russia and India Plant. The first of them was connected to for many years. But it is not the time to the Indian national power grid in October rest — Rosatom possesses all the most 2013, followed by the other in August 2016. advanced nuclear energy technologies. In The two units have VVER-1000 reactors, the a partnership with our Indian colleagues, most powerful in India.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Power Reactors in the World
    REFERENCE DATA SERIES No. 2 2010 Edition Nuclear Power Reactors in the World INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY VIENNA ISBN 978-92-0-105610-8 ISSN 1011-2642 @ 10-20781_IAEA-RDS-2-30_cover.indd 1 2010-05-26 08:59:05 REFERENCE DATA SERIES No. 2 NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS IN THE WORLD 2010 Edition INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY VIENNA, 2010 NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS IN THE WORLD IAEA, VIENNA, 2010 IAEA-RDS-2/30 ISBN 978–92–0–105610–8 ISSN 1011–2642 Printed by the IAEA in Austria July 2010 CONTENTS Introduction . 5 Definitions . 7 Table 1. Reactors in operation, long-term shutdown and under construction, 31 Dec. 2009 . 10 Table 2. Type and net electrical power of reactors connected to the grid, 31 Dec. 2009 . 12 Table 3. Type and net electrical power of reactors under construction, 31 Dec. 2009 . 13 Table 4. Reactor years of experience, up to 31 Dec. 2009 . 14 Table 5. Operating reactors and net electrical power, 1980 to 2009 . 16 Table 6. Nuclear electricity production and share from 1980 to 2009 . 18 Table 7. Annual construction starts and connections to the grid, 1954 to 2009 . 21 Table 8. Number of new reactors connected to the grid and median construction time span . 22 Table 9. Construction starts during 2009 . 24 Table 10. Connections to the grid during 2009 . 25 Table 11. Scheduled connections to the grid during 2009 . 25 Table 12. Reactors planned for construction as known on 31 Dec. 2009 . 26 Table 13. Reactors under construction, 31 Dec. 2009 . 29 Table 14. Reactors in operation, 31 Dec.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2017 (Hereinafter Federal Contests: According to Expert RA • TOP 100 (Rank 36 Ahead of All • in November 2018
    Table of Contents Adress of the Chairman of the Board of Directors Alexander Lokshin. 2 4 .2 . Financial Capital . 62 APPROVED BY Adress of the Director General Vladimir Verkhovtsev . 3 4 .2 .1 . Financial Management . 62 the resolution of the Board of Directors of JSC Atomredmetzoloto Adress of the President of the Veteran Council Nikolay Petrukhin . 4 4 .2 .2 . Financial Management Performance . 63 10 Years: Sustainable Development Trajectory . 4 4 .2 .3 . Investments . 65 (Minutes No.209 dd. May 25, 2018) 2017 Key Events. 6 4 .3 . Intellectual Capital . 67 2017 Key Indicators . 7 4 .3 .1 . Intellectual Capital Management . 68 4 .3 .2 . Innovative Performance . .. 70 1 . INFORMATION ABOUT JSC ATOMREDMETZOLOTO . 8 4 .3 .3 . Digital Economy Performance. .. 70 This Report has been pre-approved by 1 .1 . About the Company. .. 9 4 .4 . Natural Capital . .71 1 .1 .1 . General Information .. 9 4 .4 .1 . Natural Capital Management Environmental Policy . 71 the Director General, JSC Atomredmetzoloto 1 .1 .2 . Holding Structure . .. 9 4 .4 .2 . Natural Capital Management Performance: . 71 (order No. 003/124-П dd. May 14, 2018) 1 .1 .3 . Mission and Values . 10 4 .4 .2 .1 . Protection of Land Resources and Biodiversity . 71 1 .2 . Market Presence . 10 4 .4 .2 .2 . Protection of Water Resources . 72 1 .3 . Our Role in ROSATOM’s Production Cycle .. 11 4 .4 .2 .3 . Air Protection . 73 1 .4 . Supply Chain . 11 4 .4 .2 .4 . Waste Management . 74 1 .5 . Value Chain and Business Model . .. 13 4 .4 .2 .5 . Environmental Costs . 75 1 .5 .1 .
    [Show full text]
  • Rosatom: Continuous Nuclear Contamination of the Area Around the Mayak Complex
    Greenpeace Justice for Section International People and Planet Case Studies Rosatom: Continuous nuclear contamination of the area around the Mayak complex Russian nuclear corporation Rosatom has been Company activity responsible for a series of nuclear accidents at its Nuclear power and power engineering assets, as well Mayak complex, and victims have been unable to as nuclear power plant (NPP) and facilities of full nuclear secure either justice or remedy in part due to the fuel cycle design and construction.5 Rosatom is also impunity of the state-owned company in Russian responsible for part of the military nuclear activities of courts. Russia, including in Mayak. The company has a range of other businesses, including power generation in its Problem Analysis existing nuclear plants; it has a renewable division with increasing investments in wind; and it has uranium mining The Kyshtym nuclear disaster, caused by the Mayak and nuclear weapon development, amongst others. nuclear complex, was the third worst nuclear disaster in history. Despite this the Mayak nuclear complex, whose Country and location in which core business is reprocessing spent nuclear fuel, remains in the violation occurred operation. Local residents are affected both by the historical contamination and by the emissions from current activities. Ozyorsk, Chelyabinsk Oblast, the Southern Urals region, Today Mayak is run by Rosatom, Russia’s state nuclear Russia corporation. This case illustrates how the Russian state and its flagship company work closely together to continue their Summary of the case operations, despite the negative impacts on both public Rosatom’s Mayak Combine is part of the Russian state health and the environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2018
    1 APPROVED BY the resolution of the Board of Directors of JSC Atomredmetzoloto (Minutes № 239, May 24th, 2019) INTEGRATED ANNUAL REPORT JSC ATOMREDMETZOLOTO 2018 THE POWER OF GENERATIONS Table of Contents Key information 2 4 Address of the Chairman Chapter 2 . Chapter 4 . 4.3.1. Intellectual Capital 4.6.1.2. Internal Social of the Board of Directors Strategy and Markets . 24 Capital Management Management ..............66 Investment Management Alexander Lokshin . 6 Performance...............87 2.1. Strategic Vision Results . 46 4.3.2. Innovative Development 4.6.1.3. External Social and Targets . 25 Programme ...............66 Address 4.1. Production Capital......47 Investments. Contribution to the of the Director General Development 2.2. Contribution to the 4.1.1. Mineral Raw Materials 4.3.3. Digital Economy Vladimir Verkhovtsev . 8 of Operation Areas..........90 Achievement of ROSATOM’s Base Development..........47 Performance...............69 Strategic Goals ............26 4.7. Contribution Address of the Nuclear 4.1.2. Production Capital 4.4. Natural Capital ........70 to the National Projects .....94 Energy and Industry Veteran 2.3. Sustainable Development Management ..............48 Valery Litvinenko . 10 . Management ..............27 4.4.1. Natural Capital 4.1.3. Business Management. Environmental 50 Accomplishments 2.4. Natural Uranium Market Diversification .............53 Policy.....................70 of PJSC PIMCU . 6-10 Overview and Outlook ......32 4.1.3.1. Development 4.4.2. Natural Capital 2018 Key Events . .12 . of New Businesses ..........53 Management Performance ...70 4.1.3.2. Project “Production 4.4.2.1. Protection of Land 2018 Key Indicators . 13. of Associated Scandium at Resources and Biodiversity...70 JSC Dalur” ................55 4.4.2.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Mayak" Plant: Case History and the First Version of a Computer Simulator
    LBL-36212 RAC-1 The Cascade of Reservoirs of the "Mayak" Plant: Case History and the First Version of a Computer Simulator M.V. Mironenko, M.Yu. Spasennykh, V.B. Polyakov, S. Ivanitskii, A.V. Garanin, A.G. Volosov, and I.L. Khodakovsky, Vernadsky Institute of Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia A.B. Smirnov, G.Yu. Mokrov, Y.G. Glagolenko, and Eu.G. Drozhko Production Association "Mayak," Ministry of Atomic Energy, Chelyabinsk-65, Russia July 1994 Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory University of California Berkeley, California 94720 t~» This work was supponed by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management, Office of Technology Development, and the Office of Energy Research, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, under Contract No. DE-AC03-76SF00O98. DISTRIBUTION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMITED T ABSTRACT The improvement of the ecological conditions at waste storing reservoirs is an important task of the restoration activity at Production Association (PA) "Mayak" (South Urals). The radionuclides, mostly ^Sr, 137Cs, and chemical pollutants deposited in the reservoir water and in the bottom sediment are very dangerous sources for the contamination of Techa River below the reservoirs and the contamination of groundwater in the suirounding formations. The spreading of radioactive contaminants has both hydrogeological and the chemical features. The thermodynamic approach used to account for physical-chemical interactions between water and the bed rocks based on Gibbs free energy minimization of multicomponent system (H-O-Ca-Mg-K-Na-S-Cl-C-Sr) permitted to calculate the corresponding ionic and complex species existing in the solutions, and to characterize the processes of precipitation and dissolution.
    [Show full text]